Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormius
Has any of that progress had a measurable negative impact on anyone’s life? People seem to be pushing back against stuff that doesn’t affect them.
|
You'd be burying your head in the sand if you think it could possibly not affect other people's lives. Complaints are made against people who may not use the pronoun of choice, whether it be intentionally or unintentionally. Those complaints have led to additions to workstation files, disciplinary action, or termination. The introduction of cancel culture and these rights battles has led to some very interesting dynamics. Careers have been limited, damaged, or destroyed because of something that supposedly doesn't affect them. That is without looking at public pressure and the impact it can have directly on businesses or stock prices for what appears to be simple decisions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by driveway
This sounds well-reasoned, but is in fact vapid victim-blaming. Describing DEIJ programs as “forced” as opposed to “necessary.” Stating that having queer spokespeople is going “overboard.” Labelling the efforts to establish diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice as a “mistake.”
Lanny, you are giving bigots an excuse for their bigotry with language like this.
|
Wow, now I'm a victim blamer. It is amazing how quickly you can get labelled for trying to explain a position that is counter to the minority and explain why something may not be the way the minority perceives it. Really getting tired of being labeled as something I am clearly not just because one person does not like the terms or explanation put forward.
And yes, many DEI programs are forced. When institutions have a requirement to adopt a DEI Officer to maintain accreditation, that is forced. When you a mandatory requirement to use or enforce the usage of terms, that is forced. When a program is the result of political pressure rather than operational efficiency, that is forced.
What you seem to forget is that justice is represented by balance. When you provide special treatment to one group and introduce specific ways that you have to treat that group, you affect the balance of the scales. It is why I stated these things must evolve organically so balance is maintained. When a thumb is kept on the scale the outcome is never just and never one to be broadly accepted. You may not like the schedule at which the adoption takes place, but the natural adoption is more permanent than the one where people feel the oppressive hand of regulation on their shoulder. When you regulate to provide for the minority you can make victims out of the majority.